[Goldwingnut]

Originally Posted by twoplanekid

Caring that thought further, what % of funds should local CDDs control if master contracts and centralized budgeting are more efficient. It’s stated on the District web site that the Project Wide Advisory Committee, one supervisor from Districts from 5 thru 11 will provide input, explore issues and provide advice and recommendations to the SLCDD on issues related to the maintenance of Project Wide Improvements and to provide input, explore issues and provide recommendations on issues related to SLCDD owned Amenity facilities. So, real control still rests with SLCDD?

Great questions TwoPlane, I'll try to answer them.

What percentage will depend on the composition of the district, how much of the district property fall under Project Wide directions, how much burden is put on the central district office for services, how many deed compliance issues and ARC submissions there are, utility costs (think street lights here), district specific engineering services, irrigation water and maintenance costs (think in cul de sacs and villa entrances), and budgetary reserves and working capital status. There is no set percentage but the big determiner will be the amount of public/green areas. Because of the amount of green space in CDD12 one can assume that it will be a higher percentage that the other districts. It is not unreasonable for the majority of the funds to go towards the PWF to cover the majority of the big ticket items in the budget.

Resolution 13-05 established the PWAC in 2013 to provide direction on project wide issues. To date there has not been an instance were SLCDD did not follow the direction given by PWAC, but yes, SLCDD still has the ultimate power on the Project Wide Fund and issues.

Similarly Resolution 17-11 empowered the PWAC with the same responsibilities as the Amenities Authority Committee for amenities south of CR466 as the AAC has north of CR466. The charter for the AAC was the blueprint for the PWAC amenities responsibilities, in fact they read almost identical. One of the most important changes that PWAC implemented to R17-11 at the request of the CDD10 representative is the final statement of section 3 of R17-11 "Should the SLCDD not agree with the PWAC recommendations and if a delay will not adversely affect the Amenity Fund or operations, a joint meeting shall be scheduled between SLCDD and PWAC to discuss the Amenity recommendation prior to final action of the SLCDD." It's not as strong a mediation requirement as was desired but it does give PWAC an avenue of redress over a SLCDD veto, something we did not have before.

In both these responsibilities of the PWAC, yes SLCDD does have the ultimate control.

One has to of course ask the final question, why even have PWAC if they have no "authority". The answer to this, in my opinion, is simple and lies with the election process of the SLCDD Supervisors. In the residential CDDs at a given point the supervisors are elected by the registered voters of the CDD, prior to this point they are "land owner" elected. In the commercial CDDs there are no residents so all the Supervisors are land owner elected. This means that each land owner is give 1 vote for each acre or portion there of in the election, a land owner with 4 1/4 acres of land has 5 votes in the election. In the case of SLCDD the majority land owner is The Villages of Lake-Sumter (or one of their many other companies) or as they are commonly known as "the developer". So the developer basically, within the bounds of state laws, controls the SLCDD and as such controls the Project Wide responsibilities and the amenities between CR466 and SR44. Back to the original question, why even have the PWAC? Simple, they do what PWAC tell them to do, if something goes amiss they can look back and say "it's not our fault, this is what PWAC told us to do". Since PWAC comes from the elected officials of the residential CDDs, they are carrying out the residents wishes. They can pass the buck when things go bad. This is just my opinion, but if it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck...